Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
GooberMan

ID24 - a new feature set standard

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, dew said:

I'm glad we were able to establish that you guys aren't really interested in any sort of compromise and just require that everyone bows down to kraflab's whims. Went faster than expected.

I don't really understand who do you mean by "you guys", because similar or related concerns about the spec were raised in this thread coming from all over the community from people completely unrelated to kraflab or even speedrunning scene. I don't see why you would lump them all together and dismiss as some kraflab personality cult, that doesn't make sense to me. The same is true even when concerns are coming from speedrunners (like myself) or people who do demos. I personally didn't even know what is kraflab's opinion on it until his first post in this thread, and I have been outlining similarly directed concerns from the thread's very beginning.

I don't exactly know how you picture people who have doubts about the spec, but if you think this is "speedrunners against new spec because of old grudges", I think you are completely misunderstanding it.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm starting to get it a bit about this feud but, Panzermann11 asked for a summary for a "5 years old", consider me a newborn (who can read) :

 

In what way can the new port/format/Bethesda forbid the dsda/gzdoom/... to develop their own direction and, as importantly, in what way can they forbid people to map for older formats (or future new ones in the possibly independant directions dsda/gzdoom/etc could develop) ?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, apichatpong said:

I'm starting to get it a bit about this feud but, Panzermann11 asked for a summary for a "5 years old", consider me a newborn (who can read) :

 

In what way can the new port/format/Bethesda forbid the dsda/gzdoom/... to develop their own direction and, as importantly, in what way can they forbid people to map for older formats (or future new ones in the possibly independant directions dsda/gzdoom/etc could develop) ?

From what I understand, nothing.

Every port could simply ignore, or take pieces of the new spec, and include them in their ports (like only the colored sectors, and so on).

 

There is a part of the spec where the negative indexes for the new DEHACKED are reserved for id/nd/etc... but they could be simply ignored or even used by the community, in that case there is the risk of having incompatibility since you are not following the standard.

 

Of course, Todd will not hunt you in your dreams in that case :)

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Gez said:
  • But the bigger one is that demo compatibility for non-vanilla complevels is entirely missing, and that's not likely to change.

Several vanilla demos are also desyncing.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Dynamo said:

That post is a blackmail message meant to emotionally manipulate someone else. It's one thing to have and send logs suggesting someone is not being sincere on a thread - I mean, it's not pretty or anything, but it is what it is - but the moment it turns into a threat ("oh, you don't know how much I could ruin you if I showed people this", is the exact equivalent of his words), that becomes intolerable blackmail. To be honest, the fact that anyone involved in this discussion didn't find that message absolutely disgraceful says way more about them than it does about ol' kraflab, let me put it that way.

That post... is anything but blackmail. I think you're majorly misreading it and making that small reply bigger than it actually is. TL;DR before I get into specifics, it's not blackmail. It's an observation and justification as to why he immediately accused Esselfortium of ringleading a narrative against him back in the DSDA-Doom ENDOOM thread. You obviously can't extract things like tone of voice or intent from text, but it takes little to no effort to see, through context especially, that his reply is anything but blackmail.
Here, I will go back into this thread and start with 'the beginning' of their interaction relating to calling back stuff from the ENDOOM thread, and explain it step by step, and in the end, I hope you will get this blackmail nonsense out of everyone's head.

1: Esselfortium comes into the thread with her 2nd reply to it overall, pointing out Kraflab being hypocritical in his stance at the time on this thread. Due to issues I'm having with the editor, I will be using links and literal quotes for every other quoted reply incorporated here:

Quote

DSDA-dev having a history of unilateral actions like using up the entire original dehacked range for their own format, and then getting sanctimonious about another format not having gotten enough outside input, seems fairly hypocritical.



2. Deathz0r argues against Essel's previous claims in this post:

Quote

 

Come on, this is disingenuous and an extremely poor example of claims of unilateral actions -  the DSDHacked specification is remarkably straight-forward and minimal, and its sole purpose is to remove limits that have been effectively arbitrary since the Doom source code release.


Are you also saying that starting this thread asking for community input is an example of "history of unilateral actions"?

 



3. Essel replies to Deathz0r later, firstly arguing against the straight-forwardness of DSDHacked and the like; secondly arguing against Deathz0r's claim of her reply above being disingenuous and THIRDLY, very importantly, as this adds to the context of Kraflab's post which you consider to be blackmail, giving a history to Kraflab's "disingenuous replies to criticism" by pointing out, in a thread that happened two years ago, the DSDA-Doom ENDOOM Support thread, that he accused her of ringleading a narrative against him:

Quote

 

The DSDHacked specification was developed with zero consideration for other source ports. Initially it didn't even bump the DEH version number, making it impossible to detect and thus incompatible with any ports that added their own DEH features, like EE, until Altazimuth convinced him to change it. There are other examples of this that could be brought up, but I'll leave them to those more knowledgeable about the nuts and bolts.

 

Exactly what purpose would I have in being disingenuous here? I was not in any way involved with this port, nor am I on the payroll of Bethesda or Night Dive. The extent of my involvement was being part of a group at QuakeCon who were shown the draft of the standard a few hours before it was posted here, to get early feedback from the community on the spec before the wider announcement.

 

On the other hand, DSDA-dev/Kraflab/GoneAway has some history of responding disingenuously to criticism, like in the "DSDA-Doom ENDOOM support" thread where mere minutes after I appeared in the thread, long after it had already gone sour, I was accused of ringleading a narrative about him with a supposedly explicit goal of "getting rid of his source port".

 



4. Okay. So with step 3's third point that as part of context, here's the final step, the post from Kraflab you deem to be "blackmail":

Quote

I don't think this is relevant to the current topic, but somebody leaked your discord convos about me back then. Oops. Look at your posts about me in this thread - why are you even using this thread in that way?


Notice how in this reply, never does he mention a slither of "- I could leak those to everyone else if you'd like, possibly ruin you or show how wrong you are". This reply is merely a justification as to why, back in the ENDOOM Thread, he immediately accused Essel of ringleading a narrative against him, because he was shown leaked discord conversations in which, according to him, Essel was indeed ringleading a narrative and with his question at the end of his reply, he implies that the best course of action for her and for the sake of this whole thread, would be to stop using this ID24 thread to continue pushing that narrative which has nothing to do with the thread at hand. Notice: no threat was made, no handwaving or anything of the leaked convos.

I can also confidently say that even after this reply, before his ban, after his ban... he does not want them to leak to any other people. So please, I would ask you to read through and analyse the context and his post again + this reply of mine and reconsider accusing Kraflab of blackmail, it's a serious offense and these kinds are not to be attached to people lightly.

Edited by Daniel, the NCR Veteran

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Shepardus said:

Could you point to which message you're talking about? Out of the posts that Coincident linked, none of them read to me like "you don't know how much I could ruin you." The only thing I remember reading in this thread that sounded anything like that is:

which was not kraflab's post.

 

I'm really curious what the excuse is for ignoring this if one of the reasons for issuing a ban was "blackmail". Kraf's post was in poor taste, I agree, but there's a bit of a logic leap (imo) to call it blackmailThis on the other hand, is a literal threat to release information and is much more clearly blackmail.

 

It's a bit stunning to me anyone was banned in this thread, especially for a whole year; It was an understandably heated topic, and many people were showing their asses. But if Kraf and Kinsie are banned for their behavior, I can think of probably 5 or 6 other people who probably deserve it as well.

Share this post


Link to post

A thing worth noting here is that the incriminating Discord logs in question don't actually exist. I have not ringled any attacks on kraflab, so whatever he has is not what he's implying it is. It did, however, successfully stop me in my tracks for a while, because even though I know the ringleading accusations were false, I do not remember every random thing I may have said elsewhere while arguing with Kraflab on Doomworld multiple years ago, and the thread was already in such a volatile state that I didn't want to risk blowing things up further by having anything embarrassing posted that I'd forgotten about. So it did work as blackmail, it shut me up.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Meowgi said:

 

I'm really curious what the excuse is for ignoring this if one of the reasons for issuing a ban was "blackmail". Kraf's post was in poor taste, I agree, but there's a bit of a logic leap (imo) to call it blackmailThis on the other hand, is a literal threat to release information and is much more clearly blackmail.

 

It's a bit stunning to me anyone was banned in this thread, especially for a whole year; It was an understandably heated topic, and many people were showing their asses. But if Kraf and Kinsie are banned for their behavior, I can think of probably 5 or 6 other people who probably deserve it as well.

It's a threat to release information about... himself? Is that the right post? I don't understand the blackmail interpretation of this. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, esselfortium said:

It's a threat to release information about... himself? Is that the right post? I don't understand the blackmail interpretation of this. 

 

Sorry, I should have been consistent in using quotes around the word blackmail. Kraf's post came off to me as some kind of veiled shot at your character with no real evidence. Goober's, like you said, is about himself, and the wrath he is going to unleash when he's ready to. The difference is behind the intent. Nothing about Kraf's post implies it is information he is going to share, it just seemed like fueling you two's petty feud. Gooberman's post literally is telling the reader to change their mind, or he is gonna drop a "truth bomb" that is "not gonna be a good look for you".

Share this post


Link to post

Again, a truth bomb... about himself? It's not blackmail to tell someone who's accusing you of something that the reality of what you yourself did doesn't line up with their accusation, however impolitely he may have put it.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, esselfortium said:

Again, a truth bomb... about himself?

 

Sorry, I should have been consistent in using quotes around the word blackmail. Kraf's post came off to me as some kind of veiled shot at your character with no real evidence. Goober's, like you said, is about himself, and the wrath he is going to unleash when he's ready to. The difference is behind the intent. Nothing about Kraf's post implies it is information he is going to share, it just seemed like fueling you two's petty feud. Gooberman's post literally is telling the reader to change their mind, or he is gonna drop a "truth bomb" that is "not gonna be a good look for you".

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Meowgi said:

I'm really curious what the excuse is for ignoring this if one of the reasons for issuing a ban was "blackmail". Kraf's post was in poor taste, I agree, but there's a bit of a logic leap (imo) to call it blackmailThis on the other hand, is a literal threat to release information and is much more clearly blackmail.

As I was also asked about this elsewhere but didn't post it in reply to Coincident because it did not seem pertinent, I'm also going to repeat what I said:

GooberMan's post is not blackmail because, quite simply, GooberMan does not have any information on anyone that he is threatening to reveal to humiliate them. He is simply saying he will in time (something that in this case is outside of his control) reveal information about himself that should, if I understand what he's trying to say correctly, make everyone more relieved. If that also means some people will change their minds in light of that information, I'm guessing he hopes that will happen even if I personally doubt it. None of this constitutes as blackmail or even an attempt at "owning" someone. I have no idea exactly what compelled GooberMan to promise new revelations because, despite us both being members of the Doom community and sharing Discord circles, I don't work for him or with him and have seldom interacted with the guy in my life.

 

1 hour ago, Meowgi said:

Sorry, I should have been consistent in using quotes around the word blackmail. Kraf's post came off to me as some kind of veiled shot at your character with no real evidence. Goober's, like you said, is about himself, and the wrath he is going to unleash when he's ready to. The difference is behind the intent. Nothing about Kraf's post implies it is information he is going to share, it just seemed like fueling you two's petty feud. Gooberman's post literally is telling the reader to change their mind, or he is gonna drop a "truth bomb" that is "not gonna be a good look for you".

Besides the fact that I see no signal that GooberMan ever intended to release any "wrath" (but he is free to prove otherwise if he wants to), I am glad you here are specifying just exactly what makes kraflab's post so different than GooberMan, and thus why the criticism was then applicable for kraflab and not GooberMan. I hope to have cleared up this point as much as I can.

 

2 hours ago, Daniel, the NCR Veteran said:

That post... is anything but blackmail.

I understand that you went through the effort of trying to deconstruct the entire exchange, but I'm afraid I have to stop you in your tracks right here: according to you it's not blackmail. I am sorry you do not share my line of reasoning that I've explained, iterated, re-iterated and re-contextualized multiple times, and so I really don't think why you'd expect this to become the defining narrative of what actually went down when the posts are visible to everyone, as is their effect on the thread. In fact, it's especially ironic to see such conviction on your part after the tone of kraflab's message had the absolutely intended effect towards esselfortium as per her own admission.

 

2 hours ago, Daniel, the NCR Veteran said:

 You obviously can't extract things like tone of voice or intent from text, but it takes little to no effort to see, through context especially, that his reply is anything but blackmail.

So, let me get this straight, I jumped the gun because I couldn't infer what kraflab actually meant to say, but using the same metric then your explanation makes total sense and I should have seen it the same way? I'm not gonna lie, I don't get it.

 

2 hours ago, Daniel, the NCR Veteran said:

I can also confidently say that even after this reply, before his ban, after his ban... he does not want them to leak to any other people.

I mean, if he wants to leak from what I can tell completely made up logs as esselfortium wasn't able to find anything, he can by all means go ahead? The whole point about the message was to intimidate essel, and it had the intended effect. Whether any such logs even existed at all is not only completely irrelevant but also completely unrelated to why the message was actually posted. I'm glad you made such an observation since I think it confirms the intent I think is obvious behind this post even more clearly.

 

By the way, I've also said how I feel about people somehow insisting that this was not meant to be an intimidation, and I absolutely stand by that, something I don't think you've read or noticed. I don't need to re-paste it in a passive aggressive manner because we've already had enough of that.

Share this post


Link to post

I honestly do not understand how Goober's post can be genuinely interpreted as being "blackmail" in any sense. It makes no sense.

 

Kraflab's mentioning the Discord logs can be interpreted as a veiled attempt at blackmailing however. He didn't directly blackmail, but he was pretty indirectly inviting everyone on his side to search for those conversation records and post them here. At least that's what I understood.

Share this post


Link to post

image.png.ebba28b959d9e68a8547c4b024c9eb84.png


image.png.c5426934fe451f942c4f1ca2ac8949c6.png

 

All the person I was replying to did was repost the same message (It was originally only the first sentence before it was edited). I figured if they are just going to repeat themselves, I would do the same. Are they getting a warning too?

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Meowgi said:

image.png.ebba28b959d9e68a8547c4b024c9eb84.png


image.png.c5426934fe451f942c4f1ca2ac8949c6.png

 

All the person I was replying to did was repost the same message (It was originally only the first sentence before it was edited). I figured if they are just going to repeat themselves, I would do the same. Are they getting a warning too?

I don't know what your problem is with esselfortium exactly, but take it the fuck out of this thread and please take note of the very last thing I wrote in that warning message. Maybe then you'll stop being so intellectually dishonest because essel clearly wasn't trying to be passive aggressive and you were.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, apichatpong said:

In what way can the new port/format/Bethesda forbid the dsda/gzdoom/... to develop their own direction

Absolutely none.

 

And in fact, a large part of the problem IMO is that the new format had the audacity of being designed around existing community standards and meant to prevent future incompatibilities if at some point down the line a new "Legacy of Rust" happens with new official content ending up being added.

 

I actually believe that if, instead of recreating Boom/MBF21/etc. stuff it had just added whatever new (or old, but not vanilla) features it wanted in its own way, with zero attempt at using the same standards that the community is accustomed to, and keeping the specs closed instead of sharing it, there would have been a lot less drama. Because it wouldn't have been a corporation intruding on the community's territory. There wouldn't have been some weird phrasing about commercial viability. There wouldn't have been an attempt at getting ports to accept the new corporate standard and all the slippery slope anguish about what Evil Bethesda is gonna dictate next.

2 hours ago, apichatpong said:

and, as importantly, in what way can they forbid people to map for older formats (or future new ones in the possibly independant directions dsda/gzdoom/etc could develop) ?

Absolutely none.

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Billa said:

Love waking up to 3 more pages of petty bickering about he said this, she said that, he can't say that can he?? Another long long post that people will endlessly pick on one sentence from because the author got a little bit frustrated, leaving the left to rot in the dust as if it was never said at all. Every day this thread gets longer and the argument spirals more into metaphysics and venting personal disagreements and attempting to measure tone from text, and pivots away from the massive looming shadow of Bethesda hovering over us and sticking its blood-stained fingers into our community.

I think this is honestly fair at this point and I regret having myself derailed the thread over what ended up becoming talks of a ban rather than talks of ID24 concerns. I am more than open to further discuss this in private but while I did speak up against unfounded rumors in the original split (and I still stand by thinking such concerns are greatly exaggerated and often unfounded), by all means I think you and everyone else should be able to continue this discussion and separate it from the "bickering", as you refer it to, that went on in the past two pages. Feel free to suggest if you want me to split it into a new thread, perhaps starting from anotak's post on this topic, or what. Otherwise, I really hope I will get to enjoy some much needed time at the beach in what's left of this week of August as in my country we're currently in the middle of a national holiday.

Share this post


Link to post

this here seems quite cool, and the new source port is a nice adition to this community, good job

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, Billa said:

and pivots away from the massive looming shadow of Bethesda hovering over us and sticking its blood-stained fingers into our community. I do believe that the vast majority of people here have already accepted in their minds that Bethesda has the right to arbitrarily & unilaterally impose their will over the community and the game, even if it's "minor" and "not stepping on anyone's toes for now", who are we to talk back to the guys who bought the Intellectual Property Rights? Surely they spent so much on it, they must have the best intentions, they only want to give us more Content!! You've already surrendered, you might as well shut down the idgames archive and Doomworld forums right now. This is Bethesda's game now (sorry, id Software's game, because they puppet around the 30-year-old desiccated corpse of a company to feign legitimacy) and nearly everyone here is staunchly arguing from that perspective, no matter how much they try to make it look otherwise.

...and these kinds of stuff getting consistently regurgitated here right in this thread is why nothing will ever get done.

 

10+ pages have pretty much gone by without any objective assessment on the spec itself. And the only thing I see repeating is the same old anti-corporate concerns that already got addressed.

 

Is it genuinely that fucking hard to actually give objective assessments to the spec and actually come to a hard, set-in-stone agreement on potential actions if Bethesda/id/Microsoft starts fucking around further?! This shouldn't be that big of an ask at least.

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Cacodemon345 said:

anti-corporate concerns that already got addressed.

Some of them have been, but that doesn't mean people are satisfied. Also, jesus christ, calm down, we have a chance to lower the temperature and here you are getting heated again for no justifiable reason.

The only thing I see here is that perhaps the discussion on the spec itself should be separated from the ethical concerns if only because different people want to be part of these two discussions. There *is* another thread in the general section talking about the latter aspect, though.

Share this post


Link to post

wait. what the hell is going on here, I am trying to be more active in this doomworld thing but am currently confused, I will just keep looking at the earlier messages but, I am a bit intrigued by all of this

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I haven't said a word in this, because A: Who cares what I think, B: I also don't care for the warfare in here.

 

But I will say one thing on the topic that isn't clear to me and possibly others too:

How do I use any of this? It's pretty cool and all but the only way I have figured any of it out is through primitive reverse engineering, by dissecting the files currently using it and working backwards from there and I haven't figured out much yet, I'm sure it is straightforward to veterans but being a lighter tier modder/mapper (literally basic as hell releases) I had no idea how GAMECONF worked and to a layman like myself it was somewhat frustrating to have to just "figure it out" until a much more simple "for dummies" tutorial is made (which I fully expect was/is on the way and may have been waylaid by, whatever that was). The document tells you what does what very well but doesn't explain much on how to use it and what it needs to look like (correct formatting and structure ect), the BOOMTEST wad certainly does help my meagre mind to grasp it but for genuinely newer people to heavier modifications the documentation is so, I dunno, "professional" and not accessible to idiots like myself.

With that said, this was born from frustration making a GAMECONF file to make my mods upload as TNT mods instead of hard crashing, here are my findings for a GAMECONF file to do just that.
 

Basic Rundown and file structure for fellow dumb dumbs (With links to wiki explaining what to type):

Spoiler

{
  "type": "gameconf",
  "version": "1.0.0",
  "metadata": { },
  "data":
  {
    "title": "wad name here",
    "author": "your name here",
    "description": "Quick description of wad, like "small map for TNT",
    "version": "Version number of your release, so normally 1.0 for a full release or 1.1 for a patch ect",
    "iwad": "IWAD you are using, Doom.wad, doom2.wad ect",
    "pwadfiles": Required pwads (do not use multiple pwads for ulpoaded wads as it only uses one),
    "dehfiles": Also bad for uploads (put dehacked in wad),
    "executable": "Complevel required for your map to function, so is it Boom? Vanilla? New fancy ID24?",
    "mode": "What kind of Doom you are running",
    "options": Extra json options to implement
  }
}

 

Example:

Spoiler

{
  "type": "gameconf",
  "version": "1.0.0",
  "metadata": { },
  "data":
  {
    "title": "Witchell",
    "author": "MrThejoshmon",
    "description": "a large TNT level with custom textures",
    "version": "1.0",
    "iwad": "tnt.wad",
    "pwadfiles": null,
    "dehfiles": null,
    "executable": "complevel9",
    "mode": "commercial",
    "options": null
  }
}

This example will boot my TNT level correctly instead of launching Doom 2, you must put this text in an entry in your wad file like this (use SLADE3, please):

 

Spoiler

Open your wad, create an entry:

 

xqsYCEM.png


Name it GAMECONF

EL5iBVm.png

View as text:
tvr12Df.png

Input text:
8W4DuGm.png

Save and you are done.



Hopefully this helps someone like me who had no idea what to do.

Now to just figure the rest out.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, mrthejoshmon said:

Hopefully this helps someone like me who had no idea what to do.

Now to just figure the rest out.

Good on you for this. For the record if there's any place to ask for support with formats, this is likely the place to do it. I'm under the impression that the long-term goal is proper tool support for the various formats (I would assume that means SLADE GUI support or some such?). As for now yeah, I think that when they're free GooberMan et al would likely be willing to help.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Billa said:

Love waking up to 3 more pages of petty bickering about he said this, she said that, he can't say that can he?? Another long long post that people will endlessly pick on one sentence from because the author got a little bit frustrated, leaving the left to rot in the dust as if it was never said at all. Every day this thread gets longer and the argument spirals more into metaphysics and venting personal disagreements and attempting to measure tone from text, and pivots away from the massive looming shadow of Bethesda hovering over us and sticking its blood-stained fingers into our community. I do believe that the vast majority of people here have already accepted in their minds that Bethesda has the right to arbitrarily & unilaterally impose their will over the community and the game, even if it's "minor" and "not stepping on anyone's toes for now", who are we to talk back to the guys who bought the Intellectual Property Rights? Surely they spent so much on it, they must have the best intentions, they only want to give us more Content!! You've already surrendered, you might as well shut down the idgames archive and Doomworld forums right now. This is Bethesda's game now (sorry, id Software's game, because they puppet around the 30-year-old desiccated corpse of a company to feign legitimacy) and nearly everyone here is staunchly arguing from that perspective, no matter how much they try to make it look otherwise.

So, this sinister evil plot by the horrible fiends of Bethesda, I'd like to know more about it:

  • What are they going to do?
  • Why are they going to do it?
  • How are they going to do it?

Knowing that:

  • They are a corporation. Any work, even if it is work to further their nefarious plot to become the most evil corporation in the universe, is expense. Their motive is profit. Expenses are only allowed if the return on investment is significant.
  • Doom has been open-sourced for 25 years. They can't control our source port. Well, I suppose that since Microsoft owns Github, they could delete most of the source port repositories out there. I can't wait to learn how that would make them money!
  • Doom wad files are easily found on the high seas of the Internet, completely out of the control of id/Bethesda/ZeniMax/Microsoft/the Illuminati/the Reptilians from Tau Ceti.

So yes, how are they going to "arbitrarily and unilaterally impose their will", what will it entails in practice, why can they expect to gain, and do you really think it will work?

 

I just want to know how they can create a mind-control device using just a new spec for a 30-year-old game. I'm sure this is doable, but I want to know how, so I can do it myself first.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Sneezy McGlassFace said:

Do we as a community want people to re-engineer gpl code to license it away to a 3rd party?  

 

I think it is easy to make that moral argument if you are a Free Software absolutist.  However, re-implementing GPL code in a way that it can be licensed to 3rd parties has precedent in the real world, and the realpolitik results of this precedent tend to be a lot more positive on average.

 

Probably the most famous example is Clang - a permissively-licensed C and C++ compiler based on LLVM that was in essence funded by tech giants like Apple as an alternative to GCC.  You can use it as a nearly drop-in replacement for GCC at this point, and I think the that C/C++ ecosystem has benefited massively from its influence, despite its less-than-noble origins.

 

As for how this would apply to Doom?  There is almost no chance that the official port ever becomes the modding port of choice - that's a title that's already held by GZDoom.  There's also almost no chance that the official port ever becomes the speed-running port of choice - a port with a stable demo format will always prevail there, regardless of features.

 

So what we have left is a port that has demo-imperfect implementation of existing features, plus a few extra ones that were necessary to polish off Legacy of Rust.  It's also a port that is capable of playing way more of the community's content than it used to, because it's no longer stuck in whatever shade of limit-removing limitations it used to be in.

 

I personally think that second part is super important considering that it is by far the most accessible way to play Doom, and always will be so long as id Software retains the copyright to the original assets.  I imagine that if anything, there might be an influx of new community members who were inspired by playing some of the community's prior output through the official port.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×